Star Citizen Around the Verse: Manchester’s work on 3.0 and ship migration progress

This week’s Around the Verse has arrived for Star Citizen fans, helmed by both Chris Roberts and Sandi Gardiner. This episode has a crapton of footage worth a skim for the visuals alone; there’s a lengthy studio update from the folks in Manchester, discussing the accessibility of the early game, including the hint system, plus 3.0 mission development, AI pathing, lighting and reflection, weapons, animations, ships, ground vehicles, weapons, habitable units for outposts, cockpit graphics, and character customization.

Item 2.0 and the great ship migration of 2017 get the back half of the episode. The takeaway? Seats are really important. 3.0 is coming, citizens! Check it all out down below.

I guess “in development” means “in development until it no longer supports my salty attitude and I want to bitch about this and that current state of the game omg the ships are unbalanced combat is unbalanced time to kill is messed up features aren’t in gameplay isn’t in professions aren’t in the promises of all their videos aren’t in blah blah videos are bullshit until I can play it and every other developer is free to market their progress except CIG…” ffs.

There is such a thing as criticism without all the ridiculous whining. Why so much hot air? Last time I checked CIG hasn’t said OK! We’re done! This is what you get, we’re done iterating!

So what if it’s been 5 years? 6 years? 7 years? 10 years? Whatever you want to come up with as there’s probably eye-rolling semantical reasons for all of them. You could argue the idea for SC was in CR’s brain pan back when he was working on Freelancer which, yep, technically means it’s a developing idea! Yet none of that matters. The only thing that matters is if they deliver. And in order to deliver they are, because we the collective mob, have enabled them to take as long as THEY think it takes to do so. That being said, they have earned criticism for a lot of things. But time-to-develop is neither here nor there. You can argue that maybe they’d be done by now with better management early on. Maybe, but probably not. There is just no such thing as an immaculate idea that is ever perfectly executed from start to finish in software development. You may have the most seasoned and well oiled development team in the world and iteration will still be needed, good ideas will turn out to be bad, and bad ideas will still lead to wasted time.

You must be logged in to vote3You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Joe Blobers

Whoooo… are you okay man? :)

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Space Captain Zor

I’m fine, just needed to vent. I just get fatigued over the levels of ridiculousness from people who knowingly spend time in unfinished games and bitch about them being unfinished. Just because the developers of those unfinished games may themselves be guilty of various shenanigans doesn’t absolve backers/players/testers of themselves being so perpetually hard headed.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Joe Blobers

Thanks for the explaination. I call feel your pain… take a short break and keep following from adistance :)
This is coming, no doubt about that, finance are good (2M$ per month) with healthy reserve, pipelines are almost all optized and artits and devs are working hard with quality in mind. SQ42 Chapter 1 is right at the corner (a year corner may be but a year) :)

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Godnaz

Another great update on where they are at in development. I wish the other MMORPGs in development did this much to inform it’s backers and pre-order customers.

You must be logged in to vote3You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

MurderHobo

I will say they’ve improved on communicating where they’re at and what they’re doing with the project. For the longest time Around the Verse seemed too promotional and not much different from the fluff other studios put out, but at some point recently they seemed to give the production staff more focus and us more exposure to the actual work being done.

You must be logged in to vote1You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

ichi sakari

on TS last night listening to a bud who was watching this episode, it was like being in a cheap motel room while the couple next door was going at it – he literally ooooohed and ahhhhed and made funny noises, took me back a decade to when innocent excitement over a game was a thing

You must be logged in to vote4You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

deekay_000

after going back and reviewing the videos from teh first two years i don’t care what they show in video or on stage anymore until it’s on my desktop.

i used to oooh and ahh over their videos that all proved to be bullshotted bs and never remotely materialized in any fashion that reasonably reflected by those videos in the versions that they were said to preview once on our desktops.

it’s actually kind of gross imo how they behave in this manner and until they start to prove otherwise i can’t take their word or their video footage at face value.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

ichi sakari

the next patch is projected out in July, we shall see what materializes and what is bull

You must be logged in to vote3You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

deekay_000

yep. it’ll be interesting to see for sure.

i do hope it delivers cuz some of my guildies are willing to hop in at 3.0 with me if it’s worthwhile.

You must be logged in to vote2You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Godnaz

@Eliot_Lefebvre should watch this video to get an actual idea where Star Citizen is at. I would love to hear his feedback on what he saw.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

deekay_000

apparently one of the devs on reddit said that currently all ships have all their power profiles at 100% ie engines weapons and shields and that in the future these will be adjusted down.

which frankly is going to be hilarious which if you’ve played ht egame in 2.6 in pu you know why but for those that don’t play (and i know i’m pretty much alone on this site in terms of people who ACTUALLY play the game with any regularity) here’s a video from this past week of the current state of combat with one o fht emost OP p2w ships in the game that went on sale for subscribers only this week.

yes the TTK in this game in PU PVE is horrendously imba.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Dividion

First, I thought that music was terrible. As for the TTK, that was due to engaging at such a ridiculous distance, not keeping the target in the crosshairs, and playing the “jousting” game, where there are only a few seconds of damage, and then several seconds where both ships recharge.

As for TTK on larger ships, that’s still ridiculously too fast. Any ship with manned turrets should be able to take a good pounding, and any ship with escape pods should be able to last long enough for the crew to run to them. We’ll see how things play out with Item 2.0, because what we have now doesn’t reflect what it’ll become.

You must be logged in to vote1You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

deekay_000

i can tell you watched the video but don’t play PU. XD

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Dividion

It’s been a few months since I spent any time in the PU. Waiting for 3.0.

If that’s normal PU combat these days, that’s pretty sad. :(

You must be logged in to vote1You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

deekay_000

i’d wait for 3.0 too but every so often i get a craving to play some even tho it’s pretty janky and imbalanced af right now.

mostly nowadays we hunt for pvp which is better as you can see in the other video. but still really imbalanced.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

deekay_000

also you do realize that i can’t close distance on the pirates and my ship is full throttle right? that’s why they are so far away.

PS has better ai. but 3.0 previews have the same problem as seen last year and since then whenever they show 3.0 combat.

pvp TTK isn’t so bad but the balance is terrible and some ships are not combat capable currently effectively with the current balance.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

deekay_000

and here’s a video of pvp in current patch:

larger ship ttk wise they make up for it with maneuvarbility and op forward facing weapons to a degree that they make better dogfighters than they do as multicrew ships.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Roger Melly

Don’t mention p2w you’ll have the usual suspects out in force explaining at length why it isn’t pay to win . Paradoxically every time they do so they reinforce the impression that it does have a strong pay to win element .

I guess when it’s actually released we will know the full impact of selling these ships will be .

You must be logged in to vote1You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

deekay_000

seems they’d rather nitpick the mundane trivialities of when game development is routinely said to begin or act ignorant about the wider consensus of bullshot marketting videos.

in retrospect it’s surprising no one nitpicked that, and as usual it would fall flat anyway as none of them have the context of the rest of the site to know i consider all persistant games with player trading to be pay2win to some extent or another and the question is always not if but how much.

as far as star citizen specifically. i can tell you without a doubt my more expensive dogdfighters are better than cheaper base versions or basic starter ships by a very fair margin. and that even more expensive multicrew ships like the tali and connie are supreme space superiority dogfighters with no need for a crew at this time.

i don’t think that consumers in a wider sense would accept that state of things in an other early access game (as it is they tend to balk at cash shops or dlc for early access games at all) and it’s almost conspicuous the absense of the usual youtuber talking heads putting out rallying cries about it at this point.

which this style of monetization isn’t even common amongst kickstartered games as it is.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Joe Blobers

To Roger Melly:

…Say the guy who wrote 3 times in 3 sentences the words that should not been told and spending most of his total comments on SC articles with this single subject :)

In short, no it is not P2W :)

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Melissa McDonald

I would like for them to add Rift/Vive/VR visor support, Elite already has it, and there’s really no comparison to the feeling of actually being in the cockpit with a visor as opposed to viewing on a flatscreen. That would be real immersion.

But it seems their previous promises of VR support have backpedaled considerably:

ultimately there’s a shit tonne of shit they have to do before catering to the extremely niche cross section of the existing and potential customer base with VR hardware.

seems odd to ask for VR support when the game doesn’t even have gameplay based progression yet and no disclosed info when they intend to add that.

i mean yes they’re slow development wise and it’s been 6 years of development so far and only just a glorified tech demo currently available in early access in general. so yeah, something as niche and underdeveloped as VR is currently vs when the game might actually launch 20 years from now is odd to implement so “soon”/”early”

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Joe Blobers

Quote: ” it’s been 6 years of development so far”

… Wrong… 5 years at end of Nov. 2017…. With a kickstarter ending on Nov 2012 with a team of 12 guys and 6M$

About VR, not even current publishers with billions of revenues do deliver 4K AAA and great VR… none. So priority for CIG is to push techs while releasing SQ42 Chapter 1 (schedule release to be provided later this year) and large patch for Star Citizen MMO. VR for Elite is great and give the feeling on what it bring to games.

And the meantime, ATV’s provide nice insight on what is going on… with new techs to be tested with the upcoming SC 3.0 in June/July.

You must be logged in to vote1You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

deekay_000

chris roberts told magazines and potential customers prior to the kickstarter they were already a year into development.

for the nth fucking time revery single video game ever made development is said to begin with prototyping. and every single video game ever made starts with a team of about 3-20 guys.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Dividion

The only thing they did in that initial year before the kickstarter was come up with some of the basic design, SQ42 story, and the video they used for the kickstarter. During that whole time they had about 5 people working on it, some just part time. If you think that counts as a year of studio development the same way an established studio counts a year of development when they start a new project, you’re a bit delusional, especially considering the only thing kept from that year is some of the SQ42 story. All of the ships and software were scrapped and redeveloped, some of them a couple times over.

You must be logged in to vote1You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

deekay_000

that’s what early development looks like for every game.

protyping, basic design, creating a sizzle real for the publisher.

and all of that is included in development time for every other game ever made.

and destiny was in development for 5 years and scrapped almost everything from prior to the 5th year before launching. it doesn’t mean it wasn’t in development for five years.

this idea that it doesn’t count is hilariously perposterous to the nth degree. actual industry workers laugh at this narrative you guys have created.

also they scrapped almost all work done for 2 years after the kickstarter too. but still counts towards development. serious development didn’t really begin until around late 2013/early 2014. before that it was complete and utter development hell.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Joe Blobers

Except the narrative are facts… Keep giving date like 6 or even 7 years like some throw around is as well hilarious. Does full year of 2012 can be counted as part of developement if they used this time to make a video prototype? yes, okay why not.

But how much does it count in the whole project as we know it today (current 151.5 M$ pledges and contents like 3.0 to 4.0…) 0.5%? If you want to be honest, you have to recognize that pretending to give the same value to this video prototype versus current project scope is totally biaised. On purposes may be? :)

In short, I keep counting from Nov. 2012 only because there are trolls around using such prototype video time to sneaky imply the current team of 428 is working hard since 6 or 7 years on this project… which is a pure lie. And they did it on purposes because they are not there to inform but to try create trouble….

We know it… but in short, I keep counting from Nov. 2012 only because there are trolls around using such prototype video time to sneaky imply the current team of 428 is working hard since 6 or 7 years on this project… which is a pure lie. And they did it on purposes because they are not there to inform but to try create trouble….

I like how the narrative has now changed to try and claim that 2012 was just for a video/demo when CR has uneqivocally stated that wasn’t the case… talk about revisionism.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

cmdr_cotic

Sorry but that is not true. Chris made it quite clear that the year prior to the kickstarter was spent on prototyping AND development because at that point he claimed anything more than 3 years would result in people’s interest becoming stale. By all means check the interview on themittani.com for verification.
Whether he was telling the truth or not is a completely different matter.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Joe Blobers

Sure Deekay… Indeed CR was also thinking about doing a refreshed Wing Commander since the last two decades… So at which point do you start the timer development then? Do not be shy, add 5 or 6 more years :)

The team, as you perfectly know it, was 12 and with a 6M$ budget end of Nov 2012 and a basic CryEngine demo. Now keep comparing a demo prototype of what became SQ42 + SC AAA games project versus game starting developement at day one with 600 devs and full known budget of +100M$ for devs and marketing.
This is coming to fruition and that show at every single new ATV’s.

You are much better when you say that you wait for release versus expecting much from weekly videos. At least it makes sense and everybody can agree with… somehow.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

deekay_000

start the timer the same as for any other game.

again what is so hard to understand that prototyping and creating sizzle reals is a normal mundane stage of development?

your posts continue to be nonsense.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Joe Blobers

no sense? : I wrote exactly this in a following comment:

Quote: ” … yes, okay why not… ” but In short, I keep counting from Nov. 2012 only because there are trolls around using such prototype video time to sneaky imply the current team of 428 is working hard since 6 or 7 years on this project… which is a pure lie. And they did it on purposes because they are not there to inform but to try create trouble….

You must be logged in to vote1You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Melissa McDonald

Just another thing Elite does that SC doesn’t.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

deekay_000

well SC is little more than glorified tech demo atm.

even then tho i find current state of SC alot funner and more multiplayer than ED.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

cmdr_cotic

I like that Elite was built with VR in mind, because CIG are not going for early integration I can never see VR working as well. They do too many things that would just end up with people puking on their keyboards.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Michael18

SC always went for the best graphics and highest detail imaginable with today’s hardware (or rather: with the hardware at the time it will launch). Add to that the seamlessness of the game, which is another huge challenge for the tech.

Afaik, VR is *very* demanding in terms of resources in and of itself, so I can’t imagine SC going VR in the foreseeable future. I don’t think it will be enough to just reduce the poly count of ships a bit to make it work with a VR headset.

You must be logged in to vote1You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

deekay_000

lol that’s the meme right? but it’s not even closest to the best looking game on the market right now for years now and isn’t particularly demanding on hardware outside of the lack of network culling which is the only reason people get such ass fps in pu right now.

in the instanced content you can have pretty low end and old hardware and easily get 60fps capped because the scenery just isn’t as such to be demanding on hardware.

and that’s without any optimization whatsoever.

the current fps problems teh game has is entirely to network culling or lack there of. and someone with a 6 year old low end pc won’t get much worse fps than someone with a 7700k and 1080ti(we’ve tested this and this was our results)

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Michael18

well, the detail of the ships is definitely above any other current game; and the seamless transition from inside ship / space / into stations / into orbit / down to planetary surface / etc. is nothing I’ve seen anywhere else.

In terms of performance, I’m speaking from experience. I got a solid 0 to 10 fps, last time I tried the SC (unplayable), but things like witcher 3 etc run all fine. Of course, it might be some weird incompatibility of one of my hardware components, but if it does not occur anywhere else it seems unlikely. But good to know the game runs better now.

You must be logged in to vote2You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

deekay_000

> well, the detail of the ships is definitely above any other current game;
gta5 is years old and has equal fidelity on vehicles. newer games from ubisoft have equal or better fidelity on vehicles.

half of that we’;ve only seen in video from a company that has been bullshotting videos for 6 years.

and on performance again, it’s because of the network culling issues. has nothing to do with the actual graphics of the game and what’s on screen. when they fix that (which was said to be in 2.6 but got moved back to 3.0) everyone’s fps in pu is going to explode even on old low end hardware.

go run vs or ps and you’ll get 60fps capped on even low end old hardware. and those maps have more going on than pu scenes.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Michael18

go run vs or ps and you’ll get 60fps capped on even low end old hardware. and those maps have more going on than pu scenes.

actually, my fps were the same in the tutorial (with a gtx 760). But that was a long while ago, so it might have been a very bad early build. As I said, great to hear it has improved.

re videos: I can’t imagine the videos are faked. that would be pure madness on CR’s part. Well, we gonna see when 3.0 come out.

overall, I’m not a blind SC fanboy, but since they went all-in with the seamless planets, I do think SC is a very ambitious game bayond what we’ve seen in a AAA title (impressive projects like battlescape: infinity notwithstanding).

You must be logged in to vote1You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

deekay_000

tutorial was broken. that’s why they removed it. i used to get 45fps on 2600k and 680 in AC 2 or 3 years ago. on a 970 in AC i get 60fps capped since that card was new.

in pu i get 15-25fps. same as my friend with 6700k and 1080gtx and another friend with 3 series i7 and 750ti. we all three get 60fps in AC

ftr i run fraps every time i play star citizen with the fps meter visible.

believe me CIG know of the network culling issue and have disclosed to backers that it’s the reason for the poor fps in PU.

also fps isn’t a good marker for graphical fidelity. division and ghost recon wildlands are both two of the best looking games playable right now and they both run amazingly well on a wide range of hardware including consoles which are pretty low end. similar for gta5.

this video and others in the first two years were completely fake.

more recent videos than this were not as fully fake but were heavily misleading gameplay wise.

there’s also all the ship ad videos they used to do which are completely fake.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Brother Maynard

this video and others in the first two years were completely fake.

What exactly do you mean by “fake”? As in edited and with added effects? That’s clear and I’d say it was clear to many even back when the video first came out.

Other than that, it uses game assets that have been available for testing for 2 years now (the second half of the video) and the rest we can only speculate was what they were working on before planetary landing on rails was scrapped in favour of fully controlled atmospheric flight and landing, especially after Frankfurt started working on planetary tech.

If by “fake” you mean (intentionally) fraudulent work by CIG presented at the 2014 CitizenCon, that’s nonsense. All that old stuff was simply cut out, like tons of other stuff and replaced with new mechanics (in this case planetary landing developed in UK and Frankfurt and shown in 2016).

You must be logged in to vote2You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

deekay_000

the assets in this video are still in teh client and are obviously never intended for actual gameplay.

Yes they are. They are available now as the very limited ArcCorp area (anyone can see that, a simple download of the game client is all it takes) and are to be included in the game as part of the Stanton system. That’s why they were developed in the first place.

As for the landing sequence in that video, like I said, back in 2014 that was what the guided landing (on rails) was supposed to look. Until UK and Frankfurt started their work on it, CIG was repeating ad nauseam “no atmospheric flight / guided landing only”.

Since then, the old system got scrapped and replaced by fully controlled landing (in 2016). In that sense it is not fake in any way, as that was the landing mechanic under developement 3 years ago.

Yes, the video was pre-recorded, edited, additional visual effects slapped on, and so on. And then presented as live gameplay. That’s all the “fakeness” there is to it.

You must be logged in to vote2You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

deekay_000

you know that pu came out before they had the free form atmospheric landing right?

that video was a canned demo created for a aconvention to drive ship sales and in no way represents an actual fork of the game. that video btw was advertised as actual gameplay. and yet in no shape form or function is it such.

there are other videos like this from CIG over the years too.

if ubisoft ea or activision pulled this shit there would be lynch mobs from twitter to reddit over it.

You do know their ship commercials have been repeatedly said to be nothing but exercises for their cinematics team, right? People here do know the difference between a cinematic and actual live gameplay. Just because YOU think their demos are canned and just to sell ships or that the gameplay/assets they show of is something they never intend to put in a live client doesn’t mean everyone has to share your opinion. Your pitchfork waving is tiresome. The way you play and then afterwards hate SC reminds me of someone lactose intolerant sitting down to feast on a gallon of whole milk ice cream and then wondering why they feel a shit volcano brewing 10 minutes later.

You must be logged in to vote2You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Brother Maynard

I have very good idea of what I’m talking about and what CIG was talking about when they introduced this video in 2014 and then later in 2016 when they changed the landing system.

What you obstinately call “fake” in this case – the landing sequence in the first half of the video – is replacement of the tech they worked on until 2015/2016 with what UK and Germany made when they started working on the planetary tech.

Again and step by step, since you don’t seem to have been around back then: in 2013 and 2014, their whole landing stuff was supposed to be on rails and only in selected zones and planets. Back in 2013, SC forums were full of comments about this – you usually had at least one per day at one point. Any planetary tech and atmospheric flight / free landing was to come years later, because it was a feature only vaguely promised to be explored in future. Then CIG moved most of its production to the UK and hired CryEngine engineers from Crytek in Frankfurt, who started working on this stuff. And since they made a lot of progress, in 2016 the new landing system was shown to the public. How does this make the 2014 video fake? Because they decided to focus on planetary exploration, landings and procedural tech earlier than backers expected? And as a result cut the old unnecessary stuff – which you can see in the 2014 vid?

By your twisted logic, every feature that gets scrapped during development is fake. I suppose you will call old WoW models fake, since they no longer exist in the game, yet you can still see them in old videos.

Ship commercials were always presented as such – never as actual gameplay. If you actually followed SC back when CIG still made them, they were always clearly presented as commercials. People in SC forums referred to them as commercials. CR referred to them as commercials. Pretty much everyone did. This is the first time I see someone actually taking them seriously. Thanks for the good laugh!

You must be logged in to vote3You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Joe Blobers

Deekay_plus… you keep reading what you want… fine. However that does not make this video a fake and you can’t say it won’t be actual gameplay as most video does not show a lot of gameplay but very short situation or landscape.

We heard same fake, sscam and Jpges years ago with Star Marine… we know the result… more tuime to release than expected yea but fake…. no way :)

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

MurderHobo

I disagree.

All of those assets are in the game. Area 18 is in the game. The landing shown was the original concept planetary landing system (Short load screen followed by autopilot landing).

If they were bullshotting they would have had the two technicians unload the cargo, but instead they had to cut away because that system wasn’t ready. They did not bullshot us some made-up grabby hands for the demo.

A lot has changed since that video, but you’ll have to point out to me exactly which elements are faked or staged.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

cmdr_cotic

As in a vertical slice demo. The functions, gameplay and assets did not largely exist in the main branch at the time this was made, thus a whole bunch of stuff was created purely so the demo would function as intended. In that respect it is fake because the work done for the demo would not carry over to the main game.

We do not care as backers that coding made for an events does not exactly copy/paste to next events… the purposes of events are to show games directions… nobody care about coding or assets not YET in final or future patch and for a good reason… Assets will be in future patch. Even better they will be improved with better layers, lighting and so on.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

angrakhan

I own a Vive and honestly I won’t play SC with it even if they do add support. The resolution on the Vive/Rift are just too low. I can’t stand playing Elite Dangerous with my Vive. Yes, it’s immersive, but you can’t read anything on the HUD. It’s all too low resolution. Is that a 5,6, or 8? Heck if I can tell. Also, can you imagine trying to find all your keybinds in the heat of battle with an HMD on your face? Until HMD’s at least double their current resolution I’ll be sticking to the good old fashioned monitor with perhaps that fancy Tobii Eye Tracker 4C so I can have similar situational awareness in the cockpit.

You must be logged in to vote1You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Joe Blobers

And this is why there is no rush for CIG to spend to much effort on VR. Best VR sets are as well expensive (around 700$) + need of an expensive graphic card (minimum 500$)… time of VR will come but between resolution and costs we are safe for at least a good couple of years.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

zeko_rena

Out of curiosity are you using the default orange UI color?
I only have a DK2 which is even lower resolution but have found making the UI green or blue makes it about ten times easier to read the font.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

Darkwalker75 .

The key difference between Elite and SC is that Elite is a released game and as such should have support for it added, where as SC is still in development and support for such things may not be feasible at the current point in development.

It would be like asking to have kitchen applications added to a house before the construction of the house itself is completed.

You must be logged in to vote1You must be logged in to vote

2 years ago

Reader

MurderHobo

I want to experience Star Citizen in VR as well, but not until I have enough pixels to handle a proper screen-in-screen on my HUD. Star Citizen seems to have made some low-level design decisions with their display mechanics to facilitate VR, but I understand why they might put that on a side burner.